1. The Defendants jointly do so to the Plaintiff KRW 34,280,00, and KRW 22,860,000 to the Plaintiff C and B, respectively, and each of them.

1. The allegations and judgment of the parties

(a)as shown in the grounds for the change in the attachment of the claim;

[Based on recognition] For Defendant D: The purport of the entire entries and arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 11 is to the defendant corporation's high-speed tourism: by service (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act)

B. Defendant D merely asserted that he/she submitted a written reply on November 18, 2015, and did not appear even if he/she received the notice of the date of pleading of the instant case.

In addition, in full view of the overall purport of the pleadings, it is recognized that Defendant D agreed to pay KRW 40,000,000 to the Plaintiff, who is the representative of the deceased E's surviving family on February 9, 2015.

However, there is no evidence to prove that Defendant D paid this money to Plaintiff A, and taking into account all the circumstances revealed in the arguments of the instant case, such as the background of the instant accident, the age of the network E at the time of the accident, and the family relationship, etc., the Plaintiffs’ compensation amounting to KRW 80,000,000, which is claimed by the Plaintiffs, does not seem to be a considerable amount of money for the Plaintiffs to suffer emotional distress due to the instant accident, even if considering the criminal agreement concluded between

2. Accordingly, the Defendants jointly have a duty to pay the Plaintiffs the money stated in the Disposition No. 1.